We would all have free health care if it weren't for the war in Iraq. That, my dear, is kool aid.

The federal government already spends over 50 billion a year on education (among the highest per student around the world) and yet other countries are still kicking our butts - with bigger class sizes and less access to technology. In fact the more money we spend on our education system, the worse our children do. How much more money does it take?

Why is that private schools consistently outperform government schools, again, with a smaller budget, bigger class size, and larger salary for teachers?

As for "our roads" needing the money, please don't make me show you why that bridge collapsed in Minnesota. The fact that Bush had nothing to do with a "lack of funding" there would blow your whole post out of the water.

And as for "our health care" I'm sorry but my health care is mine, not yours. I don't want to share my healthcare bills with you and I don't want my doctor's office to become another government building that's run like the DMV.

Some of us actually look at taxpayers' money as the taxpayers' money, and not just another excuse for the government to spend it on something else.

I'm a typical white person.

Man, talk about "making up your own facts"! If the war is "over" why are we still fighting?

Why were we still fighting Germans and Japanese years after the war was OVER??

Some of you conservatives seem to like to "make up your own facts", I mean geez, can you imagine the BLINDING, STAGGERING, pile of horse manure this country would be in if we had tied up our soc sec in the stock market which has lost between twenty and thirty percent of it's value?

Even losing 20 to 30 percent, it still would vastly out-perform our government confiscatated retirement accounts, if they will even exist by the time I retire.   Funny, even when the market was sky-rocketing, libs still thought it was a bad idea.

You can cite all the obscure references that you want but the main reason that this country got behind this war was WMD.

Excuse me????  The main reason we went to war was to start an offensive against the terrorists.  The LIBS demanded justification through the UN, so WMD was used as one of the justifications, since btw,  there were 17 sacred UN sactions against Iraq for WMD.  

No WMD, no war.  Period.

I beg to differ.  Once the twin towers fell, war was declared, period... it was inevitable ... PERIOD.  Afghanistan and Iraq were the most logical starting points.

That means that all of the billion or so a month that we're spending could have been spent here but wait, you conservatives won't let them spend the money on OUR SCHOOLS or, OUR ROADS, or OUR HEALTH CARE, Nooooo, that violates some esoteric conservative ideal that most of you aren't that conversant with in the first place!

National defense is priority ONE.  And if it costs billions to bring stability to a terrorist cesspool, it is money well spent.  Much better than spending billions rebuilding our country after continuous terrorist strikes.   Besides, you certainly can't think we are under-spending on schools and roads???? 

But somehow providing Health Care for Muslims, Schools for Muslims and Roads for
Muslims, doesn't bother ya.  Socialism is only bad when WE benefit I guess. Kind of reminds you of liberal Foreign Policy, the only wars they'll fight are the ones we have nothing to gain by fighting!  

Good grief, rebuilding a country is not a socialist act.  It helps PREVENT socialism by encouraging CAPITALISM.

One would have thought that once there were no weapons, the "conservatives" would have closed the show due to the cost alone! But noooo Bush good, criticism bad.  And before somebody pipes up with the lame excuses that there were other items on the agenda before going to war and that it wasn't all about WMD. To you I say, YEAH RIGHT. To thine own self be true. Stop lying to yourselves.  Because you and I both know that if Bush had come before America and said "Let's go to war to save them Iraqis", not even his own party would have been on board.

Excuse me, but you are full of it.  Conservatives support this war effort because they know it is critical for the long range security of our nation.  Conservatives even supported Clinton's war on Iraq because it was warranted, even though Clinton only did it to stall the impeachment vote.  We are not like the libs, whose support and hatred of wars see-saws back and forth depending on which party  is in power.

I certainly wouldn't risk the life of ONE soldier to free an entire country full of Muslims, knowing as I do, how they really feel about us.  

Well, everybody hates us (according to the libs), so I guess we can't come to the aid of anyone.   Fortunately, our soldiers willingly and courageously put their lives on the line because they understand the importance of the mission. 

There is no logical reason to still be in Iraq OTHER than the oil which Bush has gone to great lengths to make sure we cannot possess. Having given them back their oil fields I am at a loss as to why we're there but I know this, we certainly are STILL FIGHTING. "THE WAR IS OVER?????" What kind of kool aid are you drinkin'?

If Bush takes the oil, it's "Blood for Oil", "War for Oil", blah, blah, blah.   If he leaves them the oil for humanitarian reasons, it's "Why did we go if we don't get any oil", blah, blah, blah.   WHICH IS IT?

I drink no ones kool aid.  And no party, not conservatives and certainly not liberals, are right all the time. The measure of character is whether or not one can look at an idea previously embraced by your party, and say, "this sucked" , "bad idea",  "our bad".  You cannot reasonably look at the crisis that has befallen the stock market and think that it might have been good to have your Soc Security in there as well. If you do, all I can say is , "Hey KOOL-AID!"

Huh???   We supported the war before, we support it now.   We supported private investment of OUR retirement accounts, we suppport it now.   It will undoubtedly still outperform the government's broken lock box of empty promises, where the government gets to keep it all if the investor happens to die before he has a chance to enjoy any of his hard earned retirement money. 

When asked if he went to war with Iraq  to derail the impeachment vote:  “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

I mean geez, can you imagine the BLINDING, STAGGERING, pile of horse manure this country would be in if we had tied up our soc sec in the stock market which has lost between twenty and thirty percent of it's value?

I don't see 2% of our SS money (after all, it is OUR money, not the government's) being moved into private investment as being a staggering pile of anything. Did you even read Mr. Bush's proposal, or are you merely parroting the incorrect MSM BS?

Oh, and if you think this country would have been in a staggering pile of horse manure had we Americans been allowed by our own government to put just 2% of OUR MONEY into private investment, just wait until Barack Hussein Obama's economic plan is put into place. Believe me, they are going to have to dig a manure pit the size of the Gulf of Mexico, and three times as deep, just to keep us from hitting the bottom.

Question: Exactly how much money is currently in the Social Security Trust Fund?

Answer: $0

LOL-Looks like the SS system is already in deep feces, regardless of the condition of the stock market.

You can cite all the obscure references that you want but the main reason that this country got behind this war was WMD.

The "main" reason we went into Iraq was to remove a tyrant from power. WMD's were not given as a reason by George W. Bush at any time in the process.

Why don't you do what no one has been able to so far, and provide us with a video and a transcript that shows, once and for all, that George W. Bush said that the reason we were going ointo Iraq was because of WMDs.

Either you are utterly misinformed, or you are a liar.

That means that all of the billion or so a month that we're spending could have been spent here but wait, you conservatives won't let them spend the money on OUR SCHOOLS or, OUR ROADS, or OUR HEALTH CARE,

Just because it would not have been spent in or on Iraq, what makes you think it would have, or should have, been spent here? Are people somehow entitled to OUR TAX MONEY just because they are alive and breathing? Why not return the money to the people who earned it in the first place? The American taxpayers.

Spend more money on our schools? You must be joking, as we spend far more per student than any other industrialized nation, yet we graduate a huge number of students each year who cannot even read the diplomas they are handed. More money isn't going to fix a failed government education system.

If you don't like the condition of your state and local roads, go bitch to your state legislators and county commissioners.

As for spending our tax dollars on your health care, what gives you the right to use the police powers of the federal government to take money from me AT GUN POINT and use it to pay for your health care.

Health care is not a right, nor is fast food. Pay for it yourself. 
Or, do you plan on pointing a gun at your neighbor and force him or her to cough up the money next time you have a craving for a Quarter Pounder?

Stop lying to yourselves.

Why don't you stop lying to us?

There is no logical reason to still be in Iraq OTHER than the oil which Bush has gone to great lengths to make sure we cannot possess.

Wow, you just contradicted yourself within the same sentence. If we went into Iraq just for the oil, as you are contending, why have we not taken it all for ourselves? Hmm? And why did we see gas at over $4/gal over the summer?

_______________________________________

You sound an awful lot like somebody who is totally terrified of the very concept of freedom, and who probably wants the federal government to come wipe your ass for you, no doubt at someone else's expense. 65 million of your fellow societal leeches just voted to put an avowed socialist in the White House.

I cannot wait to see the looks on your faces when the messiah stands up there and tells you all that, sorry, but this nation has run out of money.

That moment will be priceless.  :-)

-Dave

Act, your post was completely pointless and ignorant; I am much dumber for having read it.  I hope you read the responses and learn a little something about the stock market, because you obviously no nothing about it.

I would gladly put some of my SS in it right now if I had the chance.  Unfortunately, libs in Congress do not want me to have that opportunity.  They want us as dependent upon government as possible.

Act, the long-term returns of the stock market have beaten any other investment that is available.  I hazard to guess that will continue to be the case.  My 401k retirement account is mostly in the stock market; and I am still well ahead of any other investment over the past 12 years.  Also, Bush's plan allowed people to actually own the private portion of their account, which would have allowed them to pass some of their SS to their heirs.  It was a good plan that was quickly stomped out by the Dems for political reasons.  They demonize everying related to a free market while quietly raping the public coffers whenever they can.

Spitting and sputtering while talking just means they're thoughtful.  (See Barack Obama).

But when Bush does it, as he always does, it's because he's a dolt.  No president should say uh and um so much.  I mean jeeeez Mr. Bush, why say that so much?  What's your issue?  A president, stuttering constantly with uhh and ummm?  Surely we'd never again elect someone who spoke tha...

..oh, wait a minute...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyW9e5QdWxk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDJSVPAx8xc

...every single black democrat who has ever criticized George W. Bush for his manner of speaking must therefore be a racist.

-Dave

"Who's English, yours of Bush's" actually make sense to you? I rest my case as to intelligence.  

We missed your racist lunatic rants....hey, hey, welcome back.

You talk like a moron, Keith....but that's okay....you charge GWB w/same....so you can't accuse me of being racist for saying that, can you fella? 

Can you say nucwea weaponwy?  I knew you could!

Hope you put your borderline racist nutbag inner voice to bed, soon, dude.

Lata!

Only a liberal can actually say, and think it sounds completely rational, "Bush was selfish," in describing his wanting to let WE the American PEOPLE invest a portion of our OWN Social Security in the manner that WE want to invest it.  He was just so selfish to want us invest our own earned money.  The nerve of that guy.

Anyone who can splice that into a "selfish" description is pretty stupid.

Amazing!

Thanks bt. As for the show, they really are embarrassing themselves, dipping so far down into the idiot hole to come up with this mental termite. 

The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.

..and all that Gregory did all morning was feed the Democratic talking points to the guests.

Back on Barney Frank (and friends); all Gregory needed to do was to rebut with a quick, "..so then, you must be really ashamed of folks like Frank., Dodd and Meeks - right?" 

Not so fast..........

If she floats, she might either weigh as much as a duck or, be made of wood. Small rocks excluded.

She's a witch, burn her!

a liberal malfunction - then the lefties would start their investigation into his impeachment - the only thing they couldn't pin on him would be hitting an endangered group  - there's just too many of them #&^%$(!!

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

But it would be fun to watch.